Jesse

Not expecting to lose any starters. Maybe some depth guys.

That’s how we developed Brown in the first place. We’re paying Zach too much to overly invest in the depth. Prukop + rookie is what I’m expecting.

You’re not saving a whole lot on each of those moves. Probably have to make a bunch of those just to pay for the bumps for other starters you want to keep. Big bumps like Brady and Dalton are going to require more significant moves.

🤮

Haven’t added anyone, everyone’s just working on the same deals as last year, I guess.

I know I wouldn’t stick with Fajardo if I was Montreal, he’s still the weakest link.

Man, I can’t think of anything worse than that scenario. Money wont keep Dru here, it would never come to that. Keeping Schoen means finding one or two guys on rookie deals in the starting line-up. I don’t know if that would ultimately be worth the trade off.

Weird that Meier and Corny and Adams got so much then. What you’re saying makes sense, TBurg, it just never works like that in real life. There’s a world out there where Dru signs with Ottawa as the back-up to Masoli and takes a low base with start incentives. But if Ottawa cuts Masoli and sign Dru with the intention of being their starter, they are going to give him a starting salary.

We do nothing but have different opinions - there are several threads devoted to Zach vs. Dru comparisons moving forward. But you bringing it up while we're on a different topic sounds like you're trolling. I am one of the people here who welcome other team's fans - but there is a low tolerance on this forum as a whole, so if you would like to post here, consider it a friendly warning.

His base was 285, but he also got 20k for taking the first snap of the year and another 5k for every start. It was just a little insurance in case Rourke came back - As a starter, he made 350. There was no starter, top tier or bottom tier, who made less than Adams' 350k. Again, with the exception of Kelly. Again, no guarantee that Brown will be signed as a starter - but if he is - you still need to pay him a starter salary.

Probs meant Cameron.

Like I said, maybe a 50/50 shot. They could trade his rights. But they also may just "do right by the player" and give him a head start on FA so he can talk to teams early.

If Brown IS leaving and knows where he wants to go or wants the opportunity to talk to teams, there's a 50/50 chance the Bombers just release him early.

Like you say, he's their safety net and it's their job to find that next guy. It's the hardest job in sports: find a starting QB.

The top receivers have topped 300k for the past 2-3 seasons. Top RBs, including Hall of Fame calibre Canadian Andrew Harris, has not hit 175k. I agree that Brady will set the market, but he's going to set the market as a RB, which is simply at a different scale than other positions.

Zach's fine. And he's ours for at least the next two years whether he starts to decline or not. Gotta start looking for our next developmental guy. Stop trying to pull us into the weeds man, or you're just gonna get yourself banned.

Not Dru, it's too late for that, but Harris was a great bridge option to the next guy had they been able to plan it out. There is president (the Burris/Harris deal), for giving Dru a contract that pays him as a back-up in the first year and as a starter in subsequent years tho. For teams like Ottawa/Hamilton/Sask with old busted QBs in place.

Highest contract ever given out was by us, to Andrew Harris, at 170k. Brady could top that, but he's not blowing the pay scale out of the water. RBs are too replaceable.

2 years in your late 30s is kind of a big deal. We all expect Zach to potentially retire in 2 years after his current deal. I think it's a good idea to have a guy like Harris in the building as part of a rebuild. But what they need to do - starting with last year - is get a guy like Dru to be ready to step in and take the job.

I'm a huge Brady fan, but that would surprise me a lot. His ask will also be limited by the position he plays. There's a ceiling for RBs. If he's brought in as a starter, proven or not, the starting salary starts with a 3. Of course, that's not a sure thing at this point.

Not counting Kelly, who was on his rookie deal, the lowest paid starter was Adams, who got 350k. The higher paid back-ups (Arbuckle and Shilts) received 130ish and then play time bonuses for starts. to get them in the low 200s. It all depends if someone is going to go all-in on him as a starter, or if Dru is willing to bet on himself as a back-up somewhere where he thinks he can beat out an established starter or go behind a starter who's at a higher risk of missing time.

Count me as not caring one way or the other about how this went down. I think Buck would make a good HC, but glad he's staying with us while we attempt to make it 5 straight GC appearances, and even more glad he wont be leaving us for the Riders.

We all loved Cohen. But perhaps only because he was here before certain things started hitting the fan. The commish is simply the face of decisions made by the team presidents and franchises. Not too certain how much better/different things would be under Cohen. Before I address your points, I do want to share that I feel very comfortable with where the league strength is at. The Bombers are the model franchise, but BC and Montreal are showing strong growth under new ownership. Toronto is making small strides for the first time I can remember. The cap and TV deals are at their highest ever, including new money from the US (ever so small new money, but it's there). We may hate the idea of revenue sharing as the club making the most revenue, but no doubt it's supporting the league as a whole. The OPS cap that everyone hates at least has the benefit of keeping teams more fiscally responsible. The move from TD Atlantic to TD Pacific and beyond is a great upcoming promotional tool to grow the fanbase across the country. There are a lot of good things happening. Attendance is low, but it's a trend that is happening across sports and entertainment, I think. For years, the home experience has been getting better and better while tickets and food have gotten more and more expensive. But I think we are proof that a good product can still fight for it's place in the entertainment budget. Other teams saw positive trends this year too, while the Edmonton's of the world need to improve their product (I have a lot of faith in the market to support a successful team). I can't disagree with you on the convoluted rules, especially in the area of NIs and DIs and Gs. It's unnecessary and make the game inaccessible to most fans and a lot of coaches, tbh. But it also came with the stability of a new agreement with the players, so good and bad elements I suppose. I also agree that the league has stagnating a bit and is too strongly attached to risk-averse football. We definitely need a team to come in and shake things up, forcing some new ideas. I doubt the league has somehow forgotten how to scout, but the increases and changes surrounding the NFLs practice rosters and new leagues have certainly diluted the prospect pool, no doubt. It also may be a sign of the times as more and more parents don't let their kids play football. The free agent stuff is 100% overblown as we all know that the FA lists on Feb. 13 are going to be significantly different than they are today.

By what metric?

Actual CFL reporters have been calling him out on his BS since last year. They are so sick of him.